Allen v. Lenox Hill Hospital

225 A.D.2d 358, 639 N.Y.2d 21, 639 N.Y.S.2d 21, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2193

Opinion

On this record, we cannot conclude, as a matter of law, that defendant Bahr did not deviate from accepted medical practice, [359] or that such alleged deviation did not contribute to plaintiff patient’s injuring accident "in any way” (Joseph v New York City Tr. Auth., 149 AD2d 669). There are triable issues of fact including that of defendant-appellant’s asserted negligent failure to take steps to restrain plaintiff or to alert his co-defendant "covering” physician of aspects of plaintiff patient’s condition and recent behavior that might have prompted co-defendant to use restraints on the patient or take other, more stringent, precautions. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Allen v. Lenox Hill Hospital, 225 A.D.2d 358, 639 N.Y.2d 21, 639 N.Y.S.2d 21, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2193 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 358 (Allen v. Lenox Hill Hospital) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Joseph v. New York City Transit Authority
149 A.D.2d 669 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)